Tag: gains

  • Arizona bill to cut off state funding over college DEI courses gains traction

    Arizona bill to cut off state funding over college DEI courses gains traction

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

     Dive Brief:

    • An Arizona bill that would cut all state funding for public colleges offering classroom instruction related to diversity, equity and inclusion cleared a key legislative hurdle Thursday. State Senate lawmakers advanced the bill in a preliminary vote, and a final Senate vote on the measure could come as soon as Monday.
    • If enacted, the legislation would prohibit faculty at the state’s public universities and community colleges from relating “contemporary American society” to a wide range of social and economic topics, including whiteness, antiracism, unconscious bias and gender-based equity.
    • It would also ban colleges from teaching that racially neutral or color-blind policies or institutions “perpetuate oppression, injustice, race-based privilege, including white supremacy and white privilege, or inequity.”

    Dive Insight:

    State Sen. David Farnsworth introduced the bill earlier this month, saying in a recent press release that he was motivated to do so after taking a class at a nearby community college.

    “The course provided by the local community college represents the very ideology that is dividing America, teaching students to view white American men through a lens of privilege and oppression,” he said. 

    Farnsworth further described education about gender fluidity as “indoctrination” and said his proposal puts “students’ academic futures over political agendas.”

    If the bill is enacted, faculty would not be allowed to “relate contemporary American society to”:

    • Critical theory.
    • Whiteness.
    • Systemic racism.
    • Institutional racism.
    • Antiracism.
    • Microaggressions.
    • Systemic bias.
    • Implicit bias.
    • Unconscious bias.
    • Intersectionality.
    • Gender identity.
    • Social justice.
    • Cultural competence.
    • Allyship.
    • Race-based reparations.
    • Race-based privilege.
    • Race-based diversity.
    • Gender-based diversity.
    • Race-based equity.
    • Gender-based equity.
    • Race-based inclusion.
    • Gender-based inclusion.

    The bill would allow colleges to teach about subjects related to racial hatred or race-based discrimination, like slavery and Japanese-American internment in World War II — but only if instructors do not include any of the above subjects.

    The proposal faces an uncertain fate, as control of Arizona’s executive and legislative branches is split between parties, with a Democratic governor but Republican control of the House and Senate. 

    Despite growing more conservative through the 2024 election, the Republican party doesn’t have a veto-proof supermajority. And Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs, who has voiced support for and spearheaded DEI initiatives, is unlikely to sign the bill.

    Even so, the bill threatens large pools of funding for Arizona’s higher education institutions, especially its three public universities.

    Arizona’s public four-year institutions receive 74% of their funding from state support, according to a 2024 report from the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association. 

    For example, the University of Arizona’s main campus got almost $303 million in state general funds in fiscal 2024.

    Farnsworth’s bill comes as Arizona colleges are already facing two powerful headwinds — a $96.9 million reduction in overall state funding for fiscal year 2025 and a wave of federal DEI restrictions.

    Since taking office Jan. 20, President Donald Trump has signed executive orders attempting to eliminate DEI in higher education and elsewhere, though a court order recently blocked major portions of two of those orders. And the U.S. Department of Education recently issued guidance giving colleges until the end of February to cut all DEI or risk losing federal funding.

    The University of Arizona recently took down the webpage for its Office of Diversity and Inclusion. The flagship also removed references to “diversity” and “inclusion” from its land acknowledgement — a statement recognizing the Indigenous tribal land the campus sits on — though the original version remains available on at least one department webpage.

    Protesters on the University of Arizona’s main campus called on the institution’s leaders Thursday to continue its DEI initiatives.

    As of Thursday evening, almost 2,500 University of Arizona students, employees, affiliates and others signed a letter calling for the institution to reverse the changes it made to its web presence.

    “We view your actions as preemptive and harmful over-compliance,” the letter reads, referencing the university’s response to the Education Department’s guidance and Trump’s executive orders. “Faculty, staff, and students should not have to fear political retaliation for upholding academic freedom, engaging in free speech, or advocating for their rights.”

    Source link

  • New policy gives Cornell head start on New Year’s gains

    New policy gives Cornell head start on New Year’s gains

    Cornell got a jump on its New Year’s resolutions this winter, unveiling an updated version of its proposed Expressive Activity Policy just before the holiday season. On Dec. 18, the Cornell Committee on Expressive Activity released a much-improved revision of the proposed policy. This comes after FIRE and nearly 500 other organizations and individuals weighed in on an earlier draft from Oct. 30. The final say belongs to university leadership, but this update marks a significant step in the right direction. 

    One of the most notable changes from the Oct. 30 version is that the policy no longer requires students to schedule expressive activities through the 25Live reservation system. The October draft also limited spontaneous protests to Ho Plaza — a tiny patch of campus measuring merely one acre out of the sprawling 745-acre Ithaca campus. We criticized this provision as well as the scheduling requirement, and thankfully, the new proposal contains neither. 

    That’s not the only laudable change. The new policy also preserves the right to put up flyers, posters, and other expressive materials without having to identify oneself on the material. That is a critical win for students who may only feel comfortable expressing their views anonymously. 

    Cornell deserves praise for demonstrating its willingness to engage critics, make changes, and to honor the principle of free expression as enshrined in our Constitution. 

    Nor is outreach to the university required to put up material in designated posting areas. While the initial March 11 interim policy stated that approval was not required to post in designated areas, it instructed community members to “[c]ontact the applicable building coordinator or campus facilities director to find out the locations of” said areas. This effectively created a prior restraint that required students, faculty, and staff to reach out to administrators before expressing themselves. In contrast, the latest proposed policy puts the onus on personnel to “communicat[e] transparently” on where they place posting areas. 

    The committee rejected suggestions from several commenters to require pre-approval or notification before posting, choosing instead to uphold the principle of free speech and honor the school’s own noble legacy of political activism and public debate.

    Unfortunately, the new proposal is not without its flaws. It maintains a broad definition of hostile environment harassment, reflecting and even exceeding the overbroad definition set forth by the controversial Title IX regulations enacted in 2024. These federal rules require colleges to adopt a standard for harassment that includes protected speech, and as a result of deep-seated constitutional concerns, courts have blocked their implementation in 26 states. Any further federal changes to Title IX regulations would necessitate another round of changes at Cornell.

    Despite this, Cornell deserves praise for demonstrating its willingness to engage critics, make changes, and to honor the principle of free expression as enshrined in our Constitution. 

    FIRE will continue to call for the reform of Title IX regulations and for universities to adopt a definition of hostile environment harassment that better reflects First Amendment principles. We’ve been writing to the Cornell Committee on Expressive Activity every step of the way during the revision process, and we will continue to nudge Cornell toward making further progress. But for now, good on Big Red for locking in some solid gains before the new year even started. 

    If you have questions about your school’s new or existing policies, reach out to FIRE’s Policy Reform team at [email protected], and we’ll make sure you get answers. And if your school adopted policies you’re concerned about, we’re here to help you push back. You can also check out our FAQ on protests and our political speech FAQ if you’re interested in activism this spring.

    Source link